RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: The leukocyte differential count is an excellent diagnostic tool; however, the manual differential count has several drawbacks, especially for nontraditional species. Automated cell analyzers commonly used in veterinary practices require species-specific validation for use in nondomestic species other than dogs and cats. OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this study was to examine the potential of the CellaVision DM96 (DM96), an automated image analysis system, as a rapid and accurate method for providing a WBC differential count in comparison to the manual WBC differential count in bottlenose dolphins. METHODS: Ten fresh, EDTA anticoagulated blood samples were collected, blood smears were made and stained, and the differential WBC counts were performed on the DM96 and compared with manual differential WBC counts. Agreement, means, and errors were compared between the methods. RESULTS: There was good agreement between the DM96 and manual differential WBC counts for neutrophils; however, there was significant variation when comparing lymphocyte, monocyte, and eosinophil counts. No basophils were seen by any method. CONCLUSIONS: Despite a small sample size, the DM96 appeared to provide a viable alternative for automated neutrophil counting in blood of bottlenose dolphins. Whether the counts are comparable in animals with highly pathologic differential counts must be addressed in follow-up studies, preferably with more study animals.
